Sukhoi Su 30MKI

[NAMICA]

Because the Russian tech are shit...
Our R-77 ranges upto 100km (similar to Paki AIM-120C) but it can't hit targets accurately, while "extended range" of 110 km (R-77-1) & 193 km (R-77M) is equally meaningless, only on paper.

IAF can't get Meteor for Su-30, so its only option is to integrate Derby & vinyage MICA as a stopgap & wait for Astra Mark2 to be tested.

How is this possible Russia is having good experience in AAM.

 

[Bleh]

How is this possible Russia is having good experience in AAM.

Their strength is making decent platforms, strong at the very basics. S-400 too has a huge range on paper, but hasn't achieved anything on field despite Israeli air-attacks... Su-57 could achieve stealth has very high payload, endurance, thrust etc.

They were always bad at subtle tech & electronics, user friendlyness etc.

 

[Trololo]

Agree. That was the biggest drawback even during the last Indo-Pak air war post our Balakot operation.

The Su30mki can carry more number of BVR's than the F16 and also its radar range is almost double that of the F16 Block 52(375km vs 200km).It can theoretically fire 2 BVR's for every one BVR fired by the F16. But it was the Pak F16's that fired their BVR's first though it was a wasted attempt.

An Meteor equivalent like our proposed SFDR AAM will fill the lacunae because of its range of 350km.

But reports have been seen which state that the IAF has made amends and procured the latest long range AAM 's from Russia.

I think India should start developing a Spectra like EW suit for the Su30mki. It will confuse enemy radars and make the Su30mki seem smaller than the reality on enemy radar screens. Possibly lowering the RCS of the Su30mki.

I think that would probably be a meatier D-29 that will come with the MKI upgrade package. And this suite and its derivatives will be on every Indian fighter.

 

[Tridev123]

I think that would probably be a meatier D-29 that will come with the MKI upgrade package. And this suite and its derivatives will be on every Indian fighter.

Good if we succeed.

On a different note.
@BON PLAN . Does the French Spectra suite have the ability to reduce the Rafale aircraft 's RCS by misleading the enemy radar?.

How does it accomplish this task.

Can it be installed on any aircraft other than the Rafale and still work.

 

[Swiftfarts]

Good if we succeed.

On a different note.
@BON PLAN . Does the French Spectra suite have the ability to reduce the Rafale aircraft 's RCS by misleading the enemy radar?.

How does it accomplish this task.

Can it be installed on any aircraft other than the Rafale and still work.

to certain extent yes. Since it is an EW system. it probably use variety of techniques to Fool radars most like combination of different jamming techniques.
jamming technique is good way to reduce RCS and for affective burn through.
jamming power required to hide an aircraft is directly proportional to the RCS of an object It's trying to hide and is no substitute for true stealth. Just to give you an e.g If rafale has an RCS of 1m2 and require 10 KW jamming power for affective burn through than F 35 with say 100 time less RCS will require only 0.1 KW to achieve the same results as rafale.
It is a good system though nontheless.

http://fullafterburner.weebly.com/next-gen-weapons/rafale-the-omnirole-stealth-fighter

 

[Arihant Roy]

I seriously love mig 31 , it's radar antenna size gives me orgasm's...just imagine a AESA that size on a... .

View attachment 69247
Third one from left is Irbis-E ( SU 35 radar ) lol.

You are not correct.

Third one from left is NIIP / Ryazan N001VE Pero space feed antenna radar.

Besides it to the left is the original N001 from Tikhomirov . The next iteration of the N001 is the N001 Mech.

Irbis aka Snow Leopard antenna isn't present in the pic

Between sent me the link of this Zvezda doc. Is it Boenaya Priemka?

 

[Arihant Roy]

Russian electronics tech is shit!
Our RVV-AE ranges upto 100km (marginally less than Paki AIM-120C) but it can't hit targets accurately, while "extended range" of 110 km (R-77-1) & 193 km (R-77M) is equally meaningless. Obviously that's the reason IAF doesn't want them despite desperately needing such range... because these have it on paper only.

Instead of buying from Russia IAF chose to integrate Derby & vintage MICA over their "latest missiles" , as a stopgap while waiting for Astra Mark2 to be tested. They're that bad.

So there's ABSOLUTELY ZERO CHANCE that India will use their K-77 instead of Meteor & Astra Mark3 SFDR.

The vanilla R-77 or RVV-AE has a max f pole range of 80 km. Actual range against approaching fighter targets are around 50 kms.

IAF already has tested out and acquired the R-77-1 . As for K-77M, I won't say anything . Best to know it's status from the media . When IAF actually decides to reveal stuff.

And IAF has got a lot of exotic niche stuff in its inventory . Won't say anything more. Coz I DONT KNOW anything.

 

[Tridev123]

to certain extent yes. Since it is an EW system. it probably use variety of techniques to Fool radars most like combination of different jamming techniques.
jamming technique is good way to reduce RCS and for affective burn through.
jamming power required to hide an aircraft is directly proportional to the RCS of an object It's trying to hide and is no substitute for true stealth. Just to give you an e.g If rafale has an RCS of 1m2 and require 10 KW jamming power for affective burn through than F 35 with say 100 time less RCS will require only 0.1 KW to achieve the same results as rafale.
It is a good system though nontheless.

http://fullafterburner.weebly.com/next-gen-weapons/rafale-the-omnirole-stealth-fighter

Maybe something on the likes of it can be developed for the Su30mki.
Since the Su30mki has many good attributes critics love to fault it on its rather large RCS.

Not asking it to match the RCS figures of the F35 or even the Rafale.
Can a Spectra copy reduce the observable RCS of the Su30mki to equal an F16 Block52.

If it is possible then armed with the Astra mk2 of 160km range it can make the Pakistani F16 kinda obsolete.

 

[Trololo]

Maybe something on the likes of it can be developed for the Su30mki.
Since the Su30mki has many good attributes critics love to fault it on its rather large RCS.

Not asking it to match the RCS figures of the F35 or even the Rafale.
Can a Spectra copy reduce the observable RCS of the Su30mki to equal an F16 Block52.

If it is possible then armed with the Astra mk2 of 160km range it can make the Pakistani F16 kinda obsolete.

2 MKIs per squadron need to be specially modded to become Growlers of the IAF. Most DRDO technologies are ready for this.

 

[Bleh]

The vanilla R-77 or RVV-AE has a max f pole range of 80 km. Actual range against approaching fighter targets are around 50 kms.

IAF already has tested out and acquired the R-77-1 . As for K-77M, I won't say anything . Best to know it's status from the media . When IAF actually decides to reveal stuff.

And IAF has got a lot of exotic niche stuff in its inventory . Won't say anything more. Coz I DONT KNOW anything.

Then their faith on it it so less that they feel the need to desperately integrate Astra, Derby & MICA to it... The latter two being much inferior on papers.

You don't need to say anything more.

 

[Neptune]

Their strength is making decent platforms, strong at the very basics. S-400 too has a huge range on paper, but hasn't achieved anything on field despite Israeli air-attacks... Su-57 could achieve stealth has very high payload, endurance, thrust etc.

They were always bad at subtle tech & electronics, user friendlyness etc.

This is a load of BS. You should at least bring some facts and examples instead of baseless claims. Firstly the S-400 has never tried engaging any Israeli aircraft, but even an Israeli F-16 was shot down by an old S-200 when it climbed too high. Same fate for a Turkish EW F-4 and dozens of their drones recently over Libya.

Secondly Russian electronic do not suck, US electronics warfare aircraft were jammed by Russia. You don’t jam US electronics warfare aircraft if you have lousy electronics systems. Russia has developed some of the most potent jamming systems and tactical drones in the world. This is not my assessment but the assessment of think tanks and military analysts.

As for Russian seekers being junk. They seem perfectly reliable in the Houthies hands when they modify R-27s to shoot down aircraft like Tornados. In Yemen there is wreckage of Typhoons, F-16s, F-15s, Apaches, Predators, ect.

 

[Bleh]

This is a load of BS. You should at least bring some facts and examples instead of baseless claims. Firstly the S-400 has never tried engaging any Israeli aircraft, but even an Israeli F-16 was shot down by an old S-200 when it climbed too high. Same fate for a Turkish EW F-4 and dozens of their drones recently over Libya.

Secondly Russian electronic do not suck, US electronics warfare aircraft were jammed by Russia. You don’t jam US electronics warfare aircraft if you have lousy electronics systems. Russia has developed some of the most potent jamming systems and tactical drones in the world. This is not my assessment but the assessment of think tanks and military analysts.

As for Russian seekers being junk. They seem perfectly reliable in the Houthies hands when they modify R-27s to shoot down aircraft like Tornados. In Yemen there is wreckage of Typhoons, F-16s, F-15s, Apaches, Predators, ect.

Pfft... Drones, some older 4th gen strike-fighters & the Arab flown choppers?! Yeah, ok. Get a number F-35s & then talk.

Western "analysts" are famous for overestimating Russian the tech threat. Recently Israeli F-35s penetrated S-300/400 airspace (Russia & Syria denied ofcourse), but atleast the Su-57 failing to reach even 1m² RCS couldn't be covered up...

And now India has to desperately depending on obsolete French/Israeli BVRs despite owning R-77-1 apparently.

 

[Kumata]

I remember reading some where the Israeli's did fooled S300 ..even Rafael's too Fooled S300... Anyone knows what ADS armenians were using that Azeri took out... was it S 300 ?

S 400 - Never read anywhere..

 

[Neptune]

Pfft... Drones, some older 4th gen strike-fighters & the Arab flown choppers?! Yeah, ok. Get a number F-35s & then talk.

So Russian missiles suck but when I pointed out a number of modern Western aircraft getting shot down by Russian missiles in recent years now suddenly you move the goal post and tell me to show F-35s getting shot down, an aircraft that is barely operational, by that token the no one has shot down a J-20 or SU-57 either thus those aircraft are invincible

Western "analysts" are famous for overestimating Russian the tech threat.

It was US General Raymond Thomas that revealed Russia was jamming US aircraft. Try to spin that one.

Recently Israeli F-35s penetrated S-300/400 airspace (Russia & Syria denied ofcourse),

Firstly, the S-400 covers all of Israeli airspace, so what you say is utterly stupid. Secondly Russia and Israelis have agreements over Syria and Israelis inform Russia of their operations. Thirdly Russia would never fire at Israeli aircraft, fourthly no F-35 ever flew over their airbases. So once again you post stupid rubbish, rumors and claims and then make conclusions that Russia sucks.

but atleast the Su-57 failing to reach even 1m² RCS couldn't be covered up...

You are a liar. It was an old patent paper that claimed an average RCS of 0.1m2. So where is this proof of anyone failing to achieve 1m2 RCS? Just so you know no official RCS for the production model exists nor is there any official competitor numbers to compare to. All those estimates of 0.0001m2 rcs for the F-22 or F-35 are unofficial figures and frontal RCS, try taking an F-22 and doing an average RCS; suddenly the RCS will spike. The conclusion the readers can draw here is that you are dishonest and I’ll informed.


In other words you need to actually have official SU-57, F-22, F-35 RCS figures under specific frequencies and ranges as well as aspects, for example: (frontal, side, rear, average, ect) to actually claim one aircraft has poor RCS.

And now India has to desperately depending on obsolete French/Israeli BVRs despite owning R-77-1 apparently.

Quick by your logic India does not have the AIM-260 therefore the AIM-260 is crap and India is instead desperately buying Derby and Micas

 

[Neptune]

I remember reading some where the Israeli's did fooled S300 ..even Rafael's too Fooled S300... Anyone knows what ADS armenians were using that Azeri took out... was it S 300 ?

S 400 - Never read anywhere..

NATO has already studied old S-300s since Greece operates them. S-300s are old and not invisible. They need a layered defense of short, medium and long range air defenses as well as jammers and competent crews to be fully effective.

Azeris used a Harpy to destroy a 1970s era S-300 that was not even active. Notice the launch tubes are ‘down’ they have to be vertical to work.

The S-400 claims are lies internet idiots put out. No S-400 has ever attempted to engage Israeli aircraft.


Here is that empty S-300 with launch tube ‘down’.

 

[Varun2002]

With the AL-31FP engine of the Sukhoi now fully indigenised, does India have the freedom to export parts and components, and even know-how to other countries, without seeking permission from the Russians?

 

[no smoking]

With the AL-31FP engine of the Sukhoi now fully indigenised, does India have the freedom to export parts and components, and even know-how to other countries, without seeking permission from the Russians?

As long as India is still using Russia's machines/production line to produce any key Russian component/sub-system, India always need to seek permission from Russians.

 

[johnq]

China's Carrier-Based Fighter Jets Keep Crashing And Burning

China is developing a new carrier-based fighter aircraft to succeed the Shenyang J-15 Flying Shark.The J-15—which is an unlicensed Chinese development

taskandpurpose.com

China’s Carrier-Based Fighter Jets Keep Crashing And Burning

The J-15—which is an unlicensed Chinese development based on a T-10K-3 prototype of the Russian Su-33 Flanker-D—has proven to be a disappointment in service with the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN). The navalized Chinese Flanker derivative has suffered a number of high-profile crashes due to technical issues with the aircraft’s engines and flight control system.

The J-15’s problems are apparently serious enough that Beijing is embarking on the development of a new carrier-based aircraft that would take the J-15’s place in China’s nascent carrier air wings.

A “new carrier-based fighter to replace the J-15” is being developed, Lt. Gen. Zhang Honghe, deputy head of the PLA Air Force, told the South China Morning Post.

It is unclear what the J-15’s successor will look like, but whatever aircraft Beijing develops will have to be able to operate from the ski-jump configured flight decks of theType 001 and Type 001A carriers —which are developments of the Soviet Kuznetsov-class —as well as the forthcoming Type 002, which is reportedly going to be outfitted with electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS).

Chinese naval analysts have suggested that Beijing might develop a naval variant of the FC-31 Gyrfalcon, which is a “privately-funded” development of the state-owned Shenyang Aircraft Corporation.

However, there is no official confirmation from Beijing on what a J-15 replacement might look like.

The impetus for doing away with the J-15 stems from a series of four serious accidents suffered by the type.

According to the SCMP, there have been at least four J-15 crashes that have resulted in at least one fatality and one case of serious injury due to what has been described as a series of “unpardonable mechanical failures.”

The technical problems seem to be traceable to the J-15’s indigenously developed engines and flight control system.

“The J-15 is a problematic aircraft – its unstable flight control system was the key factor behind the two fatal accidents two years ago,” a source told the SCMP.

Indeed, during two of the incidents which resulted in J-15 crashes, the SCMP said the “flight control system was breaking down” on approach to the runway during Field Carrier Landing Practices (FCLP). That might suggest the J-15’s flight control laws are vulnerable to pilot induced oscillations or any number of other problems.

Additionally, it is not clear how reliable the J-15’s indigenous Shenyang Liming WS-10H engines are and if they played a factor in these crashes. Older versions of the J-15 were powered by the Russian Salyut AL-31F engines, which are more or less reliable.

The Chinese apparently were well aware of problems with the J-15 but pressed ahead with deploying the jet operationally regardless of the risk, which highlights a culture that is markedly different from the U.S. Navy.

Indeed, while the U.S. Navy will fly an aircraft with restrictions for problems that have emerged once a type has entered service, the Pentagon would not normally declare an aircraft operational if it is known to have serious safety issues.

“Of course it’s impossible to prevent any accident from ever happening during training,” a PLAN veteran told the SCMP.

“But unlike their counterparts in Western countries, Chinese air force pilots are asked to work around these mechanical errors.”

The PLAN also seems to have been in a state of denial about the extent of the J-15’s problems even after at least one naval aviator was killed in a crash (though that is often a problem with military services around the world).

“Aviation experts at first refused to acknowledge that the J-15 has design problems,” a source told the SCMP.

“They only agreed there were problems after Cao [Xianjian, a highly experienced naval aviator] encountered the same trouble.”

That the J-15 has serious design flaws should come as no surprise.

At the end of the day, the Chinese reverse engineered the J-15 design from an incomplete prototype of the Sukhoi Su-33 that it acquired from Ukraine. While Chinese engineers might have gained considerable insight into the Flanker design from the T-10K-3 and other Su-27 derivatives in Beijing’s possession, because they did not develop the jet or its systems, they do not fully understand the airframe due to some of the traditional limitations inherent to reverse engineering. These gaps in knowledge probably led to some of the problems the Chinese are now encountering with the J-15 design.

 

[BON PLAN]

@BON PLAN . Does the French Spectra suite have the ability to reduce the Rafale aircraft 's RCS by misleading the enemy radar?.

How does it accomplish this task.

Can it be installed on any aircraft other than the Rafale and still work.

Spectra is said to reduce the RCS of Rafale up to a 0,06m2

How it works ? by emitting the same signal received by the foe radar but with a half wave shift so as to cancel it. It is the theorie.

Installed on an other bird? Yes, but you will have to make from the beginning all the fine tuning of the system. Spectra knows the exact RCS of the bird, according to the direction of the emitting foe radar and the load of the bird. So on another plane you will have to do that task from the begining, and it needs a big anechoic chamber, you have to adapt the results of the tests in anechoic chamber with the reality : it's very time consuming and costly.

 

[Tridev123]

Spectra is said to reduce the RCS of Rafale up to a 0,06m2

How it works ? by emitting the same signal received by the foe radar but with a half wave shift so as to cancel it. It is the theorie.

Installed on an other bird? Yes, but you will have to make from the beginning all the fine tuning of the system. Spectra knows the exact RCS of the bird, according to the direction of the emitting foe radar and the load of the bird. So on another plane you will have to do that task from the begining, and it needs a big anechoic chamber, you have to adapt the results of the tests in anechoic chamber with the reality : it's very time consuming and costly.

So making an analogue of the Spectra will not be easy.
There are a few members who doubted that the Spectra can reduce the RCS of the Rafale.

What is the current French approach to stealth.
I believe that there is also something known as active stealth where ionisation principle is used. Are the French researching on active stealth.

Can you share Dassault's concept of a 5th generation fighter. Will it be different from the US approach.